More money to find missing girl
Discussion
sugerbear said:
So you think the obvious answer from seven people to “i have killed my child” is - “yeah we will help you cover it up”
Jesus christ.
This.Jesus christ.
Or that if you *had* drugged you child and found them lifeless your immediate thought would be to cover it up and the other parent would go along with it and *never* crack and spill the beans. That requires both parents to be psychopaths and a bit thick.
Anything is possible but kids wandering off is commonplace. Peados are rare and don't typically break into flats, and parents who kill their kids by accident and then hide the body must be vanishingly rare. Almost literally unheard of, I would imagine. Occam's razor says she wandered off and ended up in the sea or a hole in a building site Ben Needham style. People just prefer the alternatives because they're less random and more interesting.
Lotusgone said:
Muzzer79 said:
Reason for this is that the 'Tapas 7' were checking on each other's children that evening aswell as their own. Matthew Oldfield offered to check on the McCann children at 2130, which Kate accepted for him to do. He did a cursory check, without actually peering far enough into the bedroom to see if Madeleine was actually there.
So, under this theory, Kate and Gerry would only agree to that if they knew that one of their friends wouldn't find Madeleine in the room and the alarm would then be raised - so she had to not be in the room by the time they left for the restaurant.
So, between 1830 and 2030:
The children were got ready for bed
Sedatives were administered
Children fell asleep
Something happened - overdose/accident
Parents establish what has happened
Parents emotionally process that their child has died
One of the parents suggests that they cover this up
A discussion on the cover up takes place - they must wrestle with the notion, I find it impossible to believe that they both agreed on that idea immediately.
Parents create and agree a plan on how to do execute said cover up.
Parents source a place to hide the body where it won't be found (in an area they don't know)
Parents return to apartment, get ready to go out
Parent arrive to dine with their friends, who notice nothing unusual in their behaviour.
Alarm is raised at 2200 - Kate and Gerry put an Oscar-winning performance on, feigning surprise that their daughter has gone. The inevitable emotion deriving from the fact that their child died less than 4 hours ago is sidelined and replaced by fear and uncertainty.
I mean.....it's possible. A lot of things are possible. But it's pretty thin to say the least and I still don't get why seemingly so many people buy it, rather than the more obvious other possibilities.
The McCanns were not the only medics amongst the whole party. Assume for the moment that all the parents were complicit in the sedation of their respective children.So, under this theory, Kate and Gerry would only agree to that if they knew that one of their friends wouldn't find Madeleine in the room and the alarm would then be raised - so she had to not be in the room by the time they left for the restaurant.
So, between 1830 and 2030:
The children were got ready for bed
Sedatives were administered
Children fell asleep
Something happened - overdose/accident
Parents establish what has happened
Parents emotionally process that their child has died
One of the parents suggests that they cover this up
A discussion on the cover up takes place - they must wrestle with the notion, I find it impossible to believe that they both agreed on that idea immediately.
Parents create and agree a plan on how to do execute said cover up.
Parents source a place to hide the body where it won't be found (in an area they don't know)
Parents return to apartment, get ready to go out
Parent arrive to dine with their friends, who notice nothing unusual in their behaviour.
Alarm is raised at 2200 - Kate and Gerry put an Oscar-winning performance on, feigning surprise that their daughter has gone. The inevitable emotion deriving from the fact that their child died less than 4 hours ago is sidelined and replaced by fear and uncertainty.
I mean.....it's possible. A lot of things are possible. But it's pretty thin to say the least and I still don't get why seemingly so many people buy it, rather than the more obvious other possibilities.
PurpleTurtle said:
My own theories are either 1) stranger abduction, or 2) she simply wandered off having woken, exited via the unlocked patio door then came to harm by accidental means
I agree that either of these are much, much more likely.On whose evidence is it taken as fact, that any checking of the children took place after 2030? Indeed, if Mr Oldfield did so at 2130, all he would have seen was a non-moving body. Madeleine could have been sedated at 2000 and died of over-sedation before her parents left. That would give enough time for cadavarene to be produced.
When did the parents return to the apartment and by whose evidence? If it was 2145, that allows some time for panic, rapid thinking and subterfuge. I'm not sure when the other witnesses were aware of the emotional return to the restaurant, maybe it was 2200. If that was Kate McCann on her own, that leaves Gerry McCann free to hide the body in the car.
And none of them have cracked. In 16 years. At all.
Or, the McCanns took the beyond-brazen risk that one of their friends would go in to their apartment to check on their children and not notice that one of them was dead?
It’s a bonkers notion.
She was either taken or left the room herself.
Edited by Muzzer79 on Thursday 1st June 20:22
sugerbear said:
So you think the obvious answer from seven people to “i have killed my child” is - “yeah we will help you cover it up”
Jesus christ.
Hello Jesus, Jesus christ.
I'm not saying it is obvious, just a theory from the incomplete evidence available. If all the parents had sedated their children, none of them would have wanted it to come out. Also, they won a libel case in 2009 so the original motive to keep quiet was compounded by not wanting that to be overturned.
Muzzer79 said:
lemansky said:
Lotusgone said:
...that leaves Gerry McCann free to hide the body in the car.
Which car are you referring to here?
There's no actual reasoning behind these theories.
Lotusgone said:
I think you mean, you disagree with them. That's fine - you explain the indication of cadaverene, then.
The car had been hired by an undertaker who turned up in his work clothes? The dog gave a false positive?The whole idea of the corpse in the hire car is just ludicrous. If it had been remotely credible the McCanns would be in prison.
Lotusgone said:
Muzzer79 said:
lemansky said:
Lotusgone said:
...that leaves Gerry McCann free to hide the body in the car.
Which car are you referring to here?There's no actual reasoning behind these theories.
Muzzer79 said:
This came from an actual cadaver dog handler some time ago:
Also, if there was a body in the car, there would have been DNA. Remember, under the theory that the parents did it with the hire car as a tool, they had the world's media watching them constantly by the time the car came into the picture - not much time or opportunity to ensure your tracks are covered. dog handler said:
I am a cadaver dog handler and I think there's a very high chance of false positives in this case. The first thing to consider is that there were two dogs, but there was only one handler, and most false alerts are handler error.
As others have noted, there were huge breaches of search protocol in the vehicle search. Any dog will eventually give a false alert if you keep telling it to work the same area over and over, which is what happened. It's been awhile since I read it, but I recall that the pattern of alerts in the apartment also made me suspicious that they were reworking the dogs over the same areas over and over again in there. So they were basically asking for a false alert.
Even if the alerts were correct, though, we're talking about hotel rooms/vehicles where who knows what could have occurred. Someone crashes their bike and bleeds all over their clothes, then drops them in the trunk of the car and the fluid soaks into the fibers of the upholstery (or behind the sofa, or anywhere else the dogs alerted)? That could be enough to get a cadaver dog alert even though it has no relevance to the McCann case.
Dogs are pretty amazing and I have a tremendous amount of faith in mine, and all of their alerts have been backed up by forensic evidence. I'd still never convict someone just based on the evidence they provide, especially since on a few occasions that forensic evidence showed that, while the alert was correct (there was actually blood there), it had nothing to do with the actual mission we were on.
As others have noted, there were huge breaches of search protocol in the vehicle search. Any dog will eventually give a false alert if you keep telling it to work the same area over and over, which is what happened. It's been awhile since I read it, but I recall that the pattern of alerts in the apartment also made me suspicious that they were reworking the dogs over the same areas over and over again in there. So they were basically asking for a false alert.
Even if the alerts were correct, though, we're talking about hotel rooms/vehicles where who knows what could have occurred. Someone crashes their bike and bleeds all over their clothes, then drops them in the trunk of the car and the fluid soaks into the fibers of the upholstery (or behind the sofa, or anywhere else the dogs alerted)? That could be enough to get a cadaver dog alert even though it has no relevance to the McCann case.
Dogs are pretty amazing and I have a tremendous amount of faith in mine, and all of their alerts have been backed up by forensic evidence. I'd still never convict someone just based on the evidence they provide, especially since on a few occasions that forensic evidence showed that, while the alert was correct (there was actually blood there), it had nothing to do with the actual mission we were on.
Edited by Muzzer79 on Friday 2nd June 14:27
BikeBikeBIke said:
...Anything is possible but kids wandering off is commonplace. Peados are rare and don't typically break into flats, and parents who kill their kids by accident and then hide the body must be vanishingly rare. Almost literally unheard of, I would imagine. Occam's razor says she wandered off and ended up in the sea or a hole in a building site Ben Needham style. People just prefer the alternatives because they're less random and more interesting.
Whilst I agree that wandering off is much more prevalent, she would have had to have opened the (presumably) shut patio door, opened the (presumably) shut child gate to leave the patio and opened the (presumably) shut gate into the street and, from there wandered off to somewhere she wouldn't be found by subsequent searches, or be seen by anyone along the way. That just seems a whole lot less likely.Notwithstanding recently digging up bits of the local countryside, I suspect what happened will never be known, unless there is a confession. The German police have apparently been convinced their man did it but it has been 3 years now. 16 years since she disappeared, it is hard to believe there might be any useful evidence left to find.
jtremlett said:
hilst I agree that wandering off is much more prevalent, she would have had to have opened the (presumably) shut patio door, opened the (presumably) shut child gate to leave the patio and opened the (presumably) shut gate into the street and, from there wandered off to somewhere she wouldn't be found by subsequent searches, or be seen by anyone along the way. That just seems a whole lot less likely.
As a few people have mentioned above this is not far fetched at all. One of my kids (again, as I mentioned above) was more than capable of the above and absolutely would have escaped to explore. Hence why we didn’t leave our kids on their own when they were that age and we still don’t now they are a year or two older!lemansky said:
Lotusgone said:
...that leaves Gerry McCann free to hide the body in the car.
Which car are you referring to here?I'm open to hear all the theories going. Doesn't mean I'll go along with any of it, but it's still fascinating.
Which car were you suggesting Gerry was going to hide the body in?
foreright said:
jtremlett said:
hilst I agree that wandering off is much more prevalent, she would have had to have opened the (presumably) shut patio door, opened the (presumably) shut child gate to leave the patio and opened the (presumably) shut gate into the street and, from there wandered off to somewhere she wouldn't be found by subsequent searches, or be seen by anyone along the way. That just seems a whole lot less likely.
As a few people have mentioned above this is not far fetched at all. One of my kids (again, as I mentioned above) was more than capable of the above and absolutely would have escaped to explore. Hence why we didn’t leave our kids on their own when they were that age and we still don’t now they are a year or two older!sugerbear said:
foreright said:
jtremlett said:
hilst I agree that wandering off is much more prevalent, she would have had to have opened the (presumably) shut patio door, opened the (presumably) shut child gate to leave the patio and opened the (presumably) shut gate into the street and, from there wandered off to somewhere she wouldn't be found by subsequent searches, or be seen by anyone along the way. That just seems a whole lot less likely.
As a few people have mentioned above this is not far fetched at all. One of my kids (again, as I mentioned above) was more than capable of the above and absolutely would have escaped to explore. Hence why we didn’t leave our kids on their own when they were that age and we still don’t now they are a year or two older!Was there really more than one door? I read the Portuguese detective's book on this and I don't recall there being more than one door. I'd there were any gate could be closed by anyone - maybe the doors close themselves on a spring. (If so she could have intended to simply look outside and the door closed behind her.
My thought is after she complained of being left the night before she was reassured how close Mummy and Daddy were and thought, "Right, there just round the corner I'll go to them."
Occam's Razor innit.
As I’ve asked before, this is really simple. Would you have left your laptop, phone, wallet and other valuables in an unlocked holiday apartment whilst you partied?
If you had, and they were stolen, would anyone have said anything other than “you stupid idiot”?
Would checking on those valuables every half hour have been a proper replacement for securing them?
The parents’ culpability for their actions are independent of what actually happened to the girl. They created an environment that wasn’t safe.
If you had, and they were stolen, would anyone have said anything other than “you stupid idiot”?
Would checking on those valuables every half hour have been a proper replacement for securing them?
The parents’ culpability for their actions are independent of what actually happened to the girl. They created an environment that wasn’t safe.
BikeBikeBIke said:
sugerbear said:
foreright said:
jtremlett said:
hilst I agree that wandering off is much more prevalent, she would have had to have opened the (presumably) shut patio door, opened the (presumably) shut child gate to leave the patio and opened the (presumably) shut gate into the street and, from there wandered off to somewhere she wouldn't be found by subsequent searches, or be seen by anyone along the way. That just seems a whole lot less likely.
As a few people have mentioned above this is not far fetched at all. One of my kids (again, as I mentioned above) was more than capable of the above and absolutely would have escaped to explore. Hence why we didn’t leave our kids on their own when they were that age and we still don’t now they are a year or two older!Was there really more than one door? I read the Portuguese detective's book on this and I don't recall there being more than one door. I'd there were any gate could be closed by anyone - maybe the doors close themselves on a spring. (If so she could have intended to simply look outside and the door closed behind her.
My thought is after she complained of being left the night before she was reassured how close Mummy and Daddy were and thought, "Right, there just round the corner I'll go to them."
Occam's Razor innit.
paulguitar said:
skwdenyer said:
As I’ve asked before, this is really simple. Would you have left your laptop, phone, wallet and other valuables in an unlocked holiday apartment whilst you partied?
Partied?I think they were having dinner, weren't they?
Her immediate reaction was that she and husband would have taken turns to have dinner with friends or just hired a babysitter.
No way would she have left her child unattended.
Same here, we have always hired a babysitter or taken our maid with us (different country) or taken child with us to the dinner.
Whatever way you cut it - its child neglect.
However, you accidentally kill your child and then agree quickly with your spouse to cover it up….anyone that has a child knows that this would be impossible. The immediate shock, the horror.
No way are you then calmly going back to finish your tapas and wine without showing any emotion.
Also, who would cover this up for a friend? Anyone?
The above defies belief, unless it was a group holiday for extreme sociopaths.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff